[comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc] DOS 5.0 partition table

ching@brahms.amd.com (Mike Ching) (06/17/91)

I use a bootstrap program that lets me boot from any hard disk partition.
There were some changes in the partition table going from DOS 3.3 to
DOS 4.0 that kept the bootstrap from working. Anybody know if DOS 5.0
has changed the partition table? I'd hate to overwrite the boot sectors
and end up with a disk that won't boot. Thanks for any help.

Mike Ching

berk@techsys.UUCP (techsys consulting) (06/21/91)

ching@brahms.amd.com (Mike Ching) writes:

> 
> I use a bootstrap program that lets me boot from any hard disk partition.
> There were some changes in the partition table going from DOS 3.3 to
> DOS 4.0 that kept the bootstrap from working. Anybody know if DOS 5.0
> has changed the partition table? I'd hate to overwrite the boot sectors
> and end up with a disk that won't boot. Thanks for any help.
> 
> Mike Ching

If you're 4.0, 5.0 will install no sweat..

ames@reed.UUCP (S.Taimi Ames) (06/26/91)

In article <PmFV41w164w@techsys.UUCP> berk@techsys.UUCP (techsys consulting) writes:
>ching@brahms.amd.com (Mike Ching) writes:
>
>> 
>> I use a bootstrap program that lets me boot from any hard disk partition.
>> There were some changes in the partition table going from DOS 3.3 to
>> DOS 4.0 that kept the bootstrap from working. Anybody know if DOS 5.0
>> has changed the partition table? I'd hate to overwrite the boot sectors
>> and end up with a disk that won't boot. Thanks for any help.
>> 
>> Mike Ching
>
>If you're 4.0, 5.0 will install no sweat..

What is it with DOS 5 partitions anyway?  There are confirmed
problems if you use DOS 5 FDisk to change a NEC 3.3 partition,
or a Disk Manager partition (with the first, you get an occasional
"FATs don't match" message when the FATs really should; with
the second, DOS's new Mirror program won't run on any but the
C drive).  

Is DOS recording partition information differently?  Is it not
changing the old partition information?  Is it something to
do with the fact that NEC 3.3 DOS allowed >32M partitions? That
DM allowed more than 1024 cylinders on the drive?  Any ideas?

thks

taimi
ames@reed.edu